Add a better error message for unreachable k8s API server #291
Conversation
| @@ -277,10 +277,16 @@ func (k *kubeProvider) Check(ctx context.Context, req *pulumirpc.CheckRequest) ( | |||
| if err != nil { | |||
| resourceNotFound := errors.IsNotFound(err) || | |||
| strings.Contains(err.Error(), "is not supported by the server") | |||
| k8sAPIUnreachable := strings.Contains(err.Error(), "connection refused") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, it looks like this should return *errors.StatusError -- although that string munging above this line (which I've forgotten the reasoning behind) gives me a sinking feeling that this API also emits stringly-typed errors. I'm guessing we did double-check this and we have no better options? :(
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nope, looks like it's returning a *url.Error instead:
&url.Error{Op:"Get", URL:"https://localhost:6444/openapi/v2", Err:(*net.OpError)(0xc000024000)} (*url.Error)
pkg/provider/provider.go
Outdated
| } else if k8sAPIUnreachable { | ||
| failures = append(failures, &pulumirpc.CheckFailure{ | ||
| Reason: fmt.Sprintf(" Selected k8s API is not reachable. "+ | ||
| "Make sure your kubeconfig is correct. : %v", err), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about something like " Kubernetes API server at %s is unreachable. It is possible that the URL or authentication information in the kubeconfig file is incorrect"?
|
Here's the revised output: |
| @@ -283,9 +284,14 @@ func (k *kubeProvider) Check(ctx context.Context, req *pulumirpc.CheckRequest) ( | |||
| Reason: fmt.Sprintf(" Found API Group, but it did not contain a schema for '%s'", gvk), | |||
| }) | |||
| } else if k8sAPIUnreachable { | |||
| k8sURL := "" | |||
| if err, ok := err.(*url.Error); ok { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are we confident this is the only time we see this type of error? If not, might make sense to assert strings.Contains(err.URL, k8sURL) and that the error message contains connection refused -- in which case it seems like would have someway high confidence that this is the error we think it is.
Up to you though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I'm reasonably confident in this logic. It's difficult to track down the source of the error, but if we've hit this branch, it should be a *url.Error. If not, it just skips printing the URL.
Fixes #97
Here's what the error looks like after this fix: